Sound Practices Mailing List Files - Volume 2
=========================================================================
From: David Crittle <retrovox@bigpond.com>
Subject: [JN] D3a application report
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 12:41:21 +1000
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
Hey joes
I am fowarding this message from a customer. Hope it may be of interest.
(currently nil stock D3a)
>Hi again David.
>
>As you maybe remember I had plans to triode-wire the D3a tube I got from you
>and use positive grid-voltage on them.
>I found this data in a database for this tube.
>
>Ehh.. I tried it, but it didn't work very well. It worked just some minutes
>before silence came and took over. ( No smoke )
>
>I checked everything the next day and redesigned the curcuit.
>
>Now I use a 1.5 Volt battery to make negative grid voltage. I have a 62 Kohm
>resistor to the grid 1 from the negative pole and earthed the positive pole
>on the battery. G2 and anode are put together, and G3 and catode are also
>put together.
>I use a 10K/600 ohm line output transformer from Audionote as anode load.
>This is a linestage between my CD and Reichert 300B power amp. I use a
>Jensen paper in oil capacitor in from the volume to stop DC out of the
>linestage, and a little 270 ohm resistor in series with the g1 to prevent
>oscillations. The 62K resistor is connected between these C and R. Hope you
>understand. About 160 V feeding the linestage.
>
>Well, It works fine now. Have used it for 2 days to check the sound and will
>probably use it some more.
>The data said mu are 77. This is far to much for a linestage, but OK for a
>first tube in a power amp.
>The sound are very clear and the top are fine. What I have heard before from
>pentode ( C3m )in triode mode are this kind of sound. Like the top are more
>dynamic than the midrange and bass. This can come from the output
>transformer too. Or from my now little old CD player. I have a 3A/167M tube
>as a reference and it was a rather big difference between the tubes. The
>3A/167M are darker in sound ( some say to dark ), but fine in the midrange.
>Better dynamic in the lower drums. I will use the D3a more to see if the
>sound changes over time. As it seems now it would maybe play fine in a 2
>stage power amp with a little darker sounding output tube. I also played
>rock music on it and it was funny.
>
>I love these longlife tubes. If they just work year after year its how I
>like it. I got an advice to change polarity on the heaters once ayear to get
>more life out of the tubes. Of course just with DC heating. And reduce
>current when the heaters are cold. ( have you reed last Tubecad magazine? )
>http://www.tubecad.com
>
>OK. I will check it out some more, but at the moment there are High voltage
>cables out over my floor so I have to solder the curcuit down soon.
>
>Hope not wasting to much of your time.
>
>Best regards, Bernt
=========================================================================
From: Clay Turner <clayturner@earthlink.net>
Subject: [JN] Re: DA41
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:41:10 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n367
I have the DA41 in my 1952 GEC Valve Manual:
"40 watt dissipation zero bias class B triode"
Two in push-pull class B for 175 Watts!
Would anyone like me to scan the 4 pages
including schematic of typical operation?
> Now, does any joe know about a DHT triode called the DA41?
>
> Hugh R. Dean
> Melbourne, Australia
=========================================================================
From: "Rice, Doug" <RICEDA@phibred.com>
Subject: [JN] dac
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:59:39 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n798
Hi Guido,
Your DAC and website look great. Congratulations!
I am interested in PCBs, but am concerned about sourcing all the parts.
Maybe some Joenet person will organize a group purchase.
I would volunteer, but I know nothing about chips, etc.
Anyone else interested?
Doug Rice
Des Moines, IA
=========================================================================
From: "Daniel Dicker" <dbdicker@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: [JN] Re: DAC
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:59:05 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n798
>Maybe some Joenet person will organize a group purchase.
>I would volunteer, but I know nothing about chips, etc.
That would be a great idea
>Anyone else interested?
I'm definately IN!!!!!
Dan
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: [JN] Re: dac
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 23:32:57 +0100
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n798
Hi Doug
At 15:59 2-2-01 -0600, Rice, Doug wrote:
>Hi Guido,
>Your DAC and website look great. Congratulations!
thanks, I'll pass on your mail
>I am interested in PCBs,
OK
>but am concerned about sourcing all the parts.
Most parts are of the shelf, some are not and may take a while to get
>Maybe some Joenet person will organize a group purchase.
>I would volunteer, but I know nothing about chips, etc.
That would be a great idea
>Anyone else interested?
I'll keep you informed, once there are other people
regards
- -
Guido
>Doug Rice
>Des Moines, IA
=========================================================================
From: Ed Faulkner <efaulkne@mail.wsu.edu>
Subject: [JN] DAC experiments
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 14:52:46 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n993
- --=====================_13617050==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Over my lunch break I installed Guido's XO upgrade in my Phillips CDC 926
changer. It has been warming up all afternoon and is sounding great. My
first impressions are of better bass and greater dynamic range. Individual
instruments and voices are easier to distinguish, female voices are more
seductive and lush. I had previously replaced the PS caps in this unit and
have taken the output directly from the DAC chip, but this seems to be the
greatest improvement of all. Next I will have to supply it with a separate
5V supply.
Thanks to Guido for help and keeping me informed on the parts availability
(33.8688 MHz XO). David Bowie "Let's Dance" is playing right now, sweet!
Instructional Support Services
_____________________________
Ed Faulkner \ through a child's eyes
Washington State University \ sky is blue
Holland 150 \ grass is green
Pullman, WA 99164 \ I want to see again
(509) 335-7566 \
efaulkne@wsu.edu \______________________
- --=====================_13617050==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<font size=3>Over my lunch break I installed Guido's XO upgrade in my
Phillips CDC 926 changer. It has been warming up all afternoon and is
sounding great. My first impressions are of better bass and greater
dynamic range. Individual instruments and voices are easier to
distinguish, female voices are more seductive and lush. I had previously
replaced the PS caps in this unit and have taken the output directly from
the DAC chip, but this seems to be the greatest improvement of all. Next
I will have to supply it with a separate 5V supply.<br><br>
Thanks to Guido for help and keeping me informed on the parts
availability (33.8688 MHz XO). David Bowie "Let's Dance" is
playing right now, sweet!</font><br>
<br>
<div>Instructional Support Services</div>
<div>_____________________________</div>
<div>Ed
Faulkner &n
bsp;
\ through a child's eyes</div>
<div>Washington State University \ sky is
blue</div>
<div>Holland
150 &
nbsp;
\ grass is green</div>
<div>Pullman, WA
99164
\ I want to see again</div>
<div>(509)
335-7566 &n
bsp;
\ </div>
<div>efaulkne@wsu.edu &
nbsp;
\______________________</div>
</html>
- --=====================_13617050==_.ALT--
=========================================================================
From: Ed Faulkner <efaulkne@mail.wsu.edu>
Subject: [JN] DAC experiments
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 16:04:36 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n993
- --=====================_17926887==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
It's just been one hour since I posted my results of the XO upgrade to the
Joenet. This thing is sounding sweeter all the time, I'm blown away with
the results. Thanks Guido for making this simple upgrade available.
U2 "B sides" now playing while I pick my jaw up off the floor...
Instructional Support Services
_____________________________
Ed Faulkner \ through a child's eyes
Washington State University \ sky is blue
Holland 150 \ grass is green
Pullman, WA 99164 \ I want to see again
(509) 335-7566 \
efaulkne@wsu.edu \______________________
- --=====================_17926887==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<font size=3>It's just been one hour since I posted my results of the XO
upgrade to the Joenet. This thing is sounding sweeter all the time, I'm
blown away with the results. Thanks Guido for making this simple upgrade
available.<br><br>
U2 "B sides" now playing while I pick my jaw up off the
floor...</font><br>
<br>
<div>Instructional Support Services</div>
<div>_____________________________</div>
<div>Ed
Faulkner &n
bsp;
\ through a child's eyes</div>
<div>Washington State University \ sky is
blue</div>
<div>Holland
150 &
nbsp;
\ grass is green</div>
<div>Pullman, WA
99164
\ I want to see again</div>
<div>(509)
335-7566 &n
bsp;
\ </div>
<div>efaulkne@wsu.edu &
nbsp;
\______________________</div>
</html>
- --=====================_17926887==_.ALT--
=========================================================================
From: dslagle@earthlink.net (dave slagle)
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC experiments
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 19:05:44 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n993
keeping along that theme... i too did some playing with a dac today.
i grabbed an old DDE 1.0 from the heap, and added a transformer volume
control on its output.... its a pretty simple thing to do, just take out
the last coupling cap and place one lead of the transformer to the hole
nearest the chip, and the other lead back to the Vref to avoid any DC
offset...
works like a charm... there is a level of clarity to single voices i have
never heard before, but the whole thing clutters up on more complex
music....
my other butchered DDE holds together better, and had a 4:1 output trannie
feeding an autoformer, but the voices are nowhere near as clear....
so i slapped the tvc in place of the 4:1 trannie and autoformer.... same
thing... the bass eats this thing alive...
i had butt gapped the tvc, while the 4:1 was interleaved, so i restacked
the tvc with a 2X2 interleave, and the bass came back and everything
cleared up... thus far it seems like a step in the right direction....
so my guess is there wan't enough inductance with the butt gap to properly
load the dac output, and the interleave probably increased the inductance
10X.
the dynamic output impedance of the chip is listed at 100 ohms and the max
load is 3K... and my guess is the inductance butt gapped was 10 hy, and
interleave 100hy.... so the 10hy loaded the thing at 3K plus down to 47hz,
while the 100hy does it down to 4.7hz...
finally the 4:1 probably has 400hy's and is loaded by 10hy's but the
16:1impedance match makes the 10hy look more like 160hy's in parallel with
400hy's or pretty close to what the tvc
dave
=========================================================================
From: John Dahlman <jkdahlman@home.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC experiments
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 22:51:30 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n993
You know, there are some days when getting the hum out of my (cool) 227
preamp just don't seem like enough. To wit ( with great admiration):
keeping along that theme... i too did some playing with a dac today.
i grabbed an old DDE 1.0 from the heap, and added a transformer volume
control on its output....
<Snip>
i had butt gapped the tvc, while the 4:1 was interleaved, so i restacked
the tvc with a 2X2 interleave, and the bass came back and everything
cleared up... thus far it seems like a step in the right direction....
I love this group!
John
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: [JN] Re: DAC experiments
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 18:50:22 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n993
- --=====================_2765349==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Ed,
Thanks for your kind words. Your description makes note of what more people
send back as their remarks: The low jitter XO increases resolution, and
decreases the distortion.
One of the most funny things is that the low end rides along with the
improvements.
Wrt breaking in: This is true, the modules need some time
best regards
- -
Guido
At 16:04 12-10-01 -0700, Ed Faulkner wrote:
>
> It's just been one hour since I posted my results of the XO upgrade to the
> Joenet. This thing is sounding sweeter all the time, I'm blown away with the
> results. Thanks Guido for making this simple upgrade available.
>
> U2 "B sides" now playing while I pick my jaw up off the floor...
>
> Instructional Support Services
> _____________________________
> Ed Faulkner \ through a child's eyes
> Washington State University \ sky is blue
> Holland 150 \ grass is green
> Pullman, WA 99164 \ I want to see again
> (509) 335-7566 \
> efaulkne@wsu.edu \______________________
- --=====================_2765349==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
Hi Ed,<br>
<br>
Thanks for your kind words. Your description makes note of what more
people send back as their remarks: The low jitter XO increases
resolution, and decreases the distortion. <br>
<br>
One of the most funny things is that the low end rides along with the
improvements.<br>
<br>
Wrt breaking in: This is true, the modules need some time<br>
<br>
best regards<br>
- -<br>
Guido<br>
<br>
At 16:04 12-10-01 -0700, Ed Faulkner wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>It's just been one hour since I posted my
results of the XO upgrade to the Joenet. This thing is sounding sweeter
all the time, I'm blown away with the results. Thanks Guido for making
this simple upgrade available.<br>
<br>
U2 "B sides" now playing while I pick my jaw up off the
floor...<br>
<br>
Instructional Support Services<br>
_____________________________<br>
Ed
Faulkner &n
bsp;
\ through a child's eyes<br>
Washington State University \ sky is blue<br>
Holland
150 &
nbsp;
\ grass is green<br>
Pullman, WA
99164
\ I want to see again<br>
(509)
335-7566 &n
bsp;
\ <br>
efaulkne@wsu.edu
\______________________</blockquote><br>
</html>
- --=====================_2765349==_.ALT--
=========================================================================
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pierre-Fr=E9d=E9ric_Caillaud?= <pfcaillaud@cryptalis.com>
Subject: [JN] DAC experiments - News
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 10:32:17 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n990
Read the story with pictures :
http://peufeu.free.fr/audio/dac
What do you think ?
I'm so enthusiastic.
Cheers,
Pierre
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC experiments - News
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 20:48:35 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n991
Wow !
I see ferrite beads, decoupling caps, oscillators, uninterrupted
groundplanes....
But most of all, the result of a fanatic Frenchman using his soldering iron
late at night !
Curious for the sound
Guido
At 10:32 9-10-01 +0200, Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud wrote:
> Read the story with pictures :
>
>http://peufeu.free.fr/audio/dac
>
> What do you think ?
> I'm so enthusiastic.
> Cheers,
> Pierre
=========================================================================
From: "Stewart Ono" <audiodir@gte.net>
Subject: [JN] Re: DAC filters
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:45:02 -1000
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n252
In regards to the Adcom DAC chip they use a proprietary part, their part
number, but probably a 5532 variant.
I should have been more careful in criticizing the Nyquist theorem as it
really only determines the frequency response based on the sampling rate. In
practicality though, algebraic algorithms are an integral part of the
application of the Nyquist theorem. Simplistically, early programming did
assume that sinewaves were the goal. As far as multiple bit digital filters
are concerned, I used to have access to a cadcam program and back in '89, I
entered 2 alternating points and checked the correlation of the curves
created. You can get a sine wave, and you can alter the wave in 8 algorithms
(on that program) to get what looks to be a rounded saw tooth wave with a
definite bias, but no true triangle waveforms as that means the program has
to change to a point to point instruction. A long time ago, when K.Johnson
was introducing his HDCD process, I was fortunate to be able to chat with
him for a few minutes. I specifically asked him about this
potential problem, and his reply confirmed what I suspected. The choice of
algorithms are generally limited to what the designer selects for his taste,
although I believe the Ultra Analogue chips do have a sort of user
accessible code to change the algorithm. The fact is, music does not conform
to any one set of algorithms. We can try to generalize, but even in the more
classical pieces, where one would expect more of a sine wave type signal,
there is a very healthy mix of instruments which may sound more accurate in
an alternate algorithm. The Johnson influenced Spectral converter offered 5
choices, and I believe I've read something about someone (Camelot?) coming
out with an Ultra analogue unit whereby the remote could select from 8
algorithms to suit your tastes. Hardly a choice for the TAS search, which is
why a lot of people on the list have repeatedly said to use analog as the
your definitive medium.
Stu
=========================================================================
From: Kalman Rubinson <kr4@is2.nyu.edu>
Subject: Re: [JN] Re: DAC filters
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 16:48:09 -0400 (EDT)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n252
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Stewart Ono wrote:
> In regards to the Adcom DAC chip they use a proprietary part, their part
> number, but probably a 5532 variant.
Yes, but what DAC chip?
SNIP
> The Johnson influenced Spectral converter offered 5
> choices, and I believe I've read something about someone
> (Camelot?) coming out with an Ultra analogue unit whereby
> the remote could select from 8 algorithms to suit your
> tastes.
These are options offered, as you infer earlier, in the
digital (or analog) filter rather than the DAC. The Camelot
Uther DAC gives the user access to the various filter/dither
options of the PMD-100 filter and the Burmester 970 DAC
gives the user access to 3 separate digital filters and
several filter characteristics.
Kal
=========================================================================
From: Ed Billeci <tube@teleport.com>
Subject: [JN] Dac-in-the-box mods?
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 04:27:18 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n511
As long as the topic is digital, does anyone have advise on modding the
Audio Alchemy dac in the box?
In the past I have found that replacing the wall wart power supply with
batteries made a great improvement, but I am wondering how far can the
modding go with this cute little DAC.
Ed
http://www.teleport.com/~tube
=========================================================================
From: "Thomas Sylvester" <TRS@carlsmith.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] Dac-in-the-box mods?
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 10:02:46 -1000
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n511
Yo Ed-
Your trusty back issues of SP should contain an article by Mike VansEvers on this very subject, whic
h shows a tube output stage, resonance tuning, how to mod the DIB board, &c. Let me know if you can
't find it.
Regards, Tom Sylvester trs@carlsmith.com
>>> Ed Billeci <tube@teleport.com> 04/06/00 01:27AM >>>
As long as the topic is digital, does anyone have advise on modding the
Audio Alchemy dac in the box?
=========================================================================
From: Grover Gardner <groverg@postoffice.att.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Dac-in-the-box mods?
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 20:20:37 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n512
At 4:27 AM -0700 4/6/00, Ed Billeci wrote:
> As long as the topic is digital, does anyone have advise on modding the
>Audio Alchemy dac in the box?
> In the past I have found that replacing the wall wart power supply with
>batteries made a great improvement, but I am wondering how far can the
>modding go with this cute little DAC.
>
> Ed
>http://www.teleport.com/~tube
How about going the other way with power supply--a big fat
high-current job, with super-fast diodes and lots of capacitance?
- -------
Grover Gardner
groverg@postoffice.att.net
=========================================================================
From: TubeGarden@aol.com
Subject: Re: [JN] Dac-in-the-box mods?
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 21:17:00 EDT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n512
In a message dated 4/6/00 1:07:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
TRS@carlsmith.com writes:
> anyone have advise on modding the
> Audio Alchemy dac in the box?
The one I bought was DOA so the dealer sold me a Digital Decoding Engine for
another hundred bux.
Works fine (nearly three years now), but, AA went tits up and dealers are
scarce now...
Happy Ears!
Al B^}
=========================================================================
From: "Norman Tracy" <ntracy@galstar.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Dac-in-the-box mods?
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 01:37:22 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n512
In response to a request for DITB mods Grover Gardner suggested:
> How about going the other way with power supply--a big fat
> high-current job, with super-fast diodes and lots of capacitance?
Might I humbly suggest ACG's Super Symmetric Power Supply fits that bill
exactly? A pair can be seen in the X-DAC 3.0 Signature pictured on the home
page graphic of ACG's just updated web site at:
http://www.galstar.com/~ntracy/ACG/
Details of the supply are at:
http://www.galstar.com/~ntracy/ACG/SSPS/SSPS.htm
By selecting the transformer used SSPS can be configured to power DITB or
whatever you are modding.
happy listening
Norman Tracy
Audio Crafters Guild
5102 E 38 PL
Tulsa OK 74135 USA
918.627.5878 voice
918.481.0970 fax
ntracy@galstar.com e-mail
www.galstar.com/~ntracy/acg URL
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:36:07 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
dear MWP
I designed a DAC with some friends
The design will be published on the web, within a few weeks (I hope, still
writing text)
It is a traditional design but incorporates lots of attention wrt jitter,
analogue design and EMC/layout)
We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
digital PCBs (4 layers)
regards
Guido
At 17:48 10/09/2000 +0930, MWP wrote:
>Hi all,
>Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
>
>Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC which is of
>as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what parts i
can
>get here in Australia).
>Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed most
are
>quite old and use outdated parts.
>
>Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
>parts?
>Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
welcome.
>
>BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
>
>Thanks,
> MWP
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:36:12 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
dear both,
>> Please don't extract clock from the SPDIF signal.
Depends on how you that
>> Instead, have a stable clock inside your DAC, as physically close as
>possible
>> to the DAC chip itself. Then buffer the signal and send it into your CD
>player or
>> transport.
This is an easy way to achive better quality, but requires changes in the
CD player.
>No jitter this way.
dream on !
Still jitter that way:
- - The circuit generating SPDIF at the player side still contains lots of
jitter
- - Induced noise in-between player and DAC will affect the receiving end
- - The data entering the DAC chips contains jitter
- - The noise at the digital DAC pcb may affect the clock
- - The clock may contain too much jitter (in general you may need < 1ps)
Still work to do................
Have fun
=
Guido
>> Good luck...
>>
>> MWP wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
>> >
>> > Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC
which is
>of
>> > as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what
parts i
>can
>> > get here in Australia).
>> > Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed
most
>are
>> > quite old and use outdated parts.
>> >
>> > Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>> > Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>> > Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the
>older
>> > parts?
>> > Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
>welcome.
>> >
>> > BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > MWP
>>
>> --
>> _________________________
>>
>> Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
>> peufeu@free.fr
>> 32 Passage Gonin
>> 69001 Lyon
>> France
>>
>> 06 61 52 75 96
>> 04 78 43 15 94
>>
>>
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: "MWP" <hirm@chariot.net.au>
Subject: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 17:48:14 +0930
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
Hi all,
Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC which is of
as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what parts i can
get here in Australia).
Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed most are
quite old and use outdated parts.
Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
parts?
Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very welcome.
BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
Thanks,
MWP
=========================================================================
From: "MWP" <hirm@chariot.net.au>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:56:43 +0930
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
OK...
So whats the best way to create it?
BTW... what defines the speed that the sclk runs at??
Does sclk = samplerate * bits * channels ??
So this means i would need a diff sclk rate at 48Khz 16bit to 48Khz 24bit??
Thanks,
MWP
> My $.02 :
>
> Please don't extract clock from the SPDIF signal.
> Instead, have a stable clock inside your DAC, as physically close as
possible
> to the DAC chip itself. Then buffer the signal and send it into your CD
player or
> transport. No jitter this way.
> Good luck...
>
> MWP wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
> >
> > Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC which is
of
> > as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what parts i
can
> > get here in Australia).
> > Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed most
are
> > quite old and use outdated parts.
> >
> > Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
> > Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
> > Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the
older
> > parts?
> > Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
welcome.
> >
> > BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
> >
> > Thanks,
> > MWP
>
> --
> _________________________
>
> Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
> peufeu@free.fr
> 32 Passage Gonin
> 69001 Lyon
> France
>
> 06 61 52 75 96
> 04 78 43 15 94
>
>
=========================================================================
From: TubeGarden@aol.com
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:01:22 EDT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
In a message dated 9/10/00 7:31:53 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
EvaGuido@iaehv.nl writes:
> We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
> digital PCBs (4 layers)
>
Greets!
Allow me to show you my INTEREST!
Happy Ears!
Al B^}
=========================================================================
From: "Cameron Brook" <cambrook@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:40:15 +0800
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
Excellent news!! Count me in for a PCB . We've been waiting with baited
breath for this news :-)
Cameron
| I designed a DAC with some friends
|
| The design will be published on the web, within a few weeks (I hope, still
| writing text)
|
| It is a traditional design but incorporates lots of attention wrt jitter,
| analogue design and EMC/layout)
|
| We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
| digital PCBs (4 layers)
|
| regards
|
| Guido
=========================================================================
From: "johari yip" <johariyip@mailcityasia.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 07:57:15 +0800
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
Hi Guido,
This is great news. Do you have an esimate as to how much will the DAC, including parts, will cost?
I'll go for it if it's within my budget.
Johari
- --
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:36:07 evaguido wrote:
>dear MWP
>
>I designed a DAC with some friends
>
>The design will be published on the web, within a few weeks (I hope, still
>writing text)
>
>It is a traditional design but incorporates lots of attention wrt jitter,
>analogue design and EMC/layout)
>
>We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
>digital PCBs (4 layers)
>
>regards
>
>Guido
>
>
>At 17:48 10/09/2000 +0930, MWP wrote:
>>Hi all,
>>Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
>>
>>Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC which is of
>>as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what parts i
>can
>>get here in Australia).
>>Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed most
>are
>>quite old and use outdated parts.
>>
>>Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>>Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>>Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
>>parts?
>>Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
>welcome.
>>
>>BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
>>
>>Thanks,
>> MWP
>>
>>
>>
>
Get your FREE Email at http://www.mailcityasia.com
=========================================================================
From: John Levreault <jlevro@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:56:37 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n658
"J. Gordon Rankin" wrote:
>
> Just a note since I use these. The receiver is surface mount the filter
> caps must ne also. Use a transformer to couple the digital in. You will
> have to layout a board as these parts require a ground plane. If these
> things are not done, it is hard to get a lock on the signal it will also
> drift if these things are not adhered to.
If you've got good eyesight, a steady hand, and a fine-tipped soldering
iron, it's pretty easy to do one-offs with surface mount parts.
Superglue the IC "dead-bug" style to a copper sheet (circuit board
material is good), i.e. on its back with its "legs" (pins) sticking up
in the air. Carefully and slowly bend down any pins that need to be
grounded and solder to the copper groundplane. Use chip caps for
bypasses by mounting them vertically, with one end soldered to the
groundplane and the other resting on the IC pin. Make your connections
with #30 wire, like wirewrap wire. You can use leaded parts for
interconnections, etc.
YMMV, etc.
JL
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:08:09 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n658
Cameron
I have noted your inquiry. Price is still unknown, as dependant on quantity
Will let you know
Guido
At 22:40 10/09/2000 +0800, Cameron Brook wrote:
>Excellent news!! Count me in for a PCB . We've been waiting with baited
>breath for this news :-)
>
>Cameron
>
>| I designed a DAC with some friends
>|
>| The design will be published on the web, within a few weeks (I hope, still
>| writing text)
>|
>| It is a traditional design but incorporates lots of attention wrt jitter,
>| analogue design and EMC/layout)
>|
>| We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
>| digital PCBs (4 layers)
>|
>| regards
>|
>| Guido
>
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:08:14 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n658
Johari
At the time of building the total component cost was about $ 700
That included expensive parts as digital filter, low jitter VCXO, 4 layer
digital board etcetera
We are only preparing to sell the digital PCBs, as all the other work
cannnot be carried out next to our regular jobs
We will only manufacture PCBs if there is enough interest, otherwise the
series price will be too expensive
I'll post once it is on the web
best regards
Guido
At 07:57 11/09/2000 +0800, johari yip wrote:
>Hi Guido,
>
>This is great news. Do you have an esimate as to how much will the DAC,
including parts, will cost? I'll go for it if it's within my budget.
>
>Johari
>--
>
>On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:36:07 evaguido wrote:
>>dear MWP
>>
>>I designed a DAC with some friends
>>
>>The design will be published on the web, within a few weeks (I hope, still
>>writing text)
>>
>>It is a traditional design but incorporates lots of attention wrt jitter,
>>analogue design and EMC/layout)
>>
>>We will not sell kits but once there appears to be interest we'll sell
>>digital PCBs (4 layers)
>>
>>regards
>>
>>Guido
>>
>>
>>At 17:48 10/09/2000 +0930, MWP wrote:
>>>Hi all,
>>>Im kinda new to this list, so be gentle :)
>>>
>>>Im considering making myself a plain 1 in (spdif) 2 out (l&r) DAC which
is of
>>>as high quality as i can make it (which will prolly depend on what parts i
>>can
>>>get here in Australia).
>>>Ive looked around at alll the DIY designs on the net and have noticed most
>>are
>>>quite old and use outdated parts.
>>>
>>>Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>>>Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>>>Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
>>>parts?
>>>Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
>>welcome.
>>>
>>>BTW... is this on topic for this forum??
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>> MWP
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>Get your FREE Email at http://www.mailcityasia.com
>
>
=========================================================================
From: "J. Gordon Rankin" <waudio@cinti.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 00 17:17:59 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n658
>Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
>parts?
>Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
>welcome.
MWP,
Just a note since I use these. The receiver is surface mount the filter
caps must ne also. Use a transformer to couple the digital in. You will
have to layout a board as these parts require a ground plane. If these
things are not done, it is hard to get a lock on the signal it will also
drift if these things are not adhered to.
Gordon
=====> Wavelength Audio <=====
mailto:waudio@cinti.net
mailto:wavelength@fuse.net
http://www.WavelengthAudio.com
ph.fx. 513-271-4186 USA
=========================================================================
From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:11:51 GMT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Hi all,
>If you've got good eyesight, a steady hand, and a fine-tipped soldering
>iron, it's pretty easy to do one-offs with surface mount parts.
I can only second that. I'm doing just now another DAC (CS8412 & TDA1541)
this way.
While we are at it, some "tricks" for such circuits.
First the "decoupling tripplett". This was originally discussed ages ago in
RAHE by Pete Gourdeou, he suggested a 120uF/25V Panasonic HFQ Cap and
various SMD 0612 Chip Cap's, these super low Inductance, but very hard to
get hold of. I have done some more work myself sine and have come up with th
following:
Main Decoupling 'lytic Capacitor should be a Sanyo Os-Con with a fairly ESR.
In the SC Series there are several units with 150 mOhm ESR, these are ideal.
I use 15uF/16V SC Series ones. You don't want lower ESR!!!!
Directly at the Chip's pins you place a 0.01uF 25V SMD Cap with X7R
Dielectric, paralleled as close as possible with a 0.1uF 25V SMD Cap with
Z5U dielectric.
If this is wired with MINIMAL loop areas it gives a very low and very well
behaved impedance between about 10kHz and and 40Mz with the Impedance being
below 1 Ohm all the way up to above 100MHz. In this case the overall ESR's
are critically matched with the dual Ceramic Cap Combo having around 120
mOhm up to around 20Mhz and the Os-Con having 150 mOhm op to about 400kHz.
All the different tankcircuits are well damped without any drastic impedance
swings.
But it really needs the 0805 SMD Capacitors with around 1nH residual
Inductance and a REALLY TIGHT layout.
Later T
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
=========================================================================
From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:22:13 GMT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Hi there,
>Inside scoop on the TDA1541 (I got it from the designer himself): make sure
>the DEM clock is locked to (derived from) the wordclock,
What DEM Clock? There is no such pin in any of my Datasheets.
Later T
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
=========================================================================
From: "Remco Stoutjesdijk" <r.m.stoutjesdijk@student.utwente.nl>
Subject: RE: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:45:34 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
> I can only second that. I'm doing just now another DAC
> (CS8412 & TDA1541)
> this way.
Inside scoop on the TDA1541 (I got it from the designer himself): make sure
the DEM clock is locked to (derived from) the wordclock, in other cases a
beat-tone might occur. Might, because it's at random, some DACs will, some
won't give this tone. But in any case it's a remedy against jitter.
Regards,
Remco
- --
http://listen.to/rmsaudio
=========================================================================
From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:33:25 GMT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Hi,
>Now did you consider the loop impedance too ?
I placed the SMD Cap's as close to the chip body as possible. I'm aware that
the rest of the loop (actual Pins and internal connection) introduce notably
more inductance, but at least I made sure to have the best possible result
within the limits imposed by not being able to use naked chips.
>Very often the gnd pin and the Vss / Vdd pins are not located in
>each-others vicinity (they should but...)
In case of the CS8412 they are. In case of the TDA1541 it is minimised by my
"trick" of actually wrapping the chip body in self adheasive copperfoil and
using this as groundplane. Again, it reduces the loop impedance as much as
mechanically possible. Something that is (again) very hard to achieve using
PCB's with only 2 layers (and anything above that is really outside the
domain of most enthusiasts).
>And please: Place and connect the capacitors as close as possible to the
>ground pin of the device, to avoid voltage build-up across the groundplane
We are within about 6mm for the DAC. This is the best possible.
Later T
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:13:22 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Hi all
I agree with Gordon, the implementation is very important
Functionally the CS8415 is OK (bit recovery on the pre-amble, Hooray!)
Don't know the CS4397 (yet)
Guido
At 17:17 11/09/2000 -0400, J. Gordon Rankin wrote:
>>Im thinking of using the CS8415A (96k reciever) and the CS4397 (24-Bit,
>>Multi-Standard DAC) for the digital side of the DAC.
>>Anyone seen/heard of any comments made on these parts compared to the older
>>parts?
>>Any other comments/tips from experience with these parts is also very
>>welcome.
>
>MWP,
>
>Just a note since I use these. The receiver is surface mount the filter
>caps must ne also. Use a transformer to couple the digital in. You will
>have to layout a board as these parts require a ground plane. If these
>things are not done, it is hard to get a lock on the signal it will also
>drift if these things are not adhered to.
>
>Gordon
>
>=====> Wavelength Audio <=====
>mailto:waudio@cinti.net
>mailto:wavelength@fuse.net
>http://www.WavelengthAudio.com
>ph.fx. 513-271-4186 USA
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:34:04 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Thorsten,
Thank you for your decoupling experience, however I have a remark:
At 12:11 12/09/2000 GMT, T. Loesch wrote:
>If this is wired with MINIMAL loop areas it gives a very low and very well
>behaved impedance between about 10kHz and and 40Mz with the Impedance
>being below 1 Ohm all the way up to above 100MHz. In this case the overall
>ESR's >are critically matched with the dual Ceramic Cap Combo having
>around 120 mOhm up to around 20Mhz and the Os-Con having 150 mOhm op to
>about 400kHz. All the different tankcircuits are well damped without any
>drastic impedance swings.
Which is excelent !
>But it really needs the 0805 SMD Capacitors with around 1nH residual
>Inductance
Now did you consider the loop impedance too ? Very often the gnd pin and
the Vss / Vdd pins are not located in each-others vicinity (they should
but...)
In that case the wiring inductance dominates the part inductance; No need
to look for 1 nH as the loop often has more than 10 nH
>and a REALLY TIGHT layout.
And please: Place and connect the capacitors as close as possible to the
ground pin of the device, to avoid voltage build-up across the groundplane
Enjoy
Guido
>Later T
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:00:05 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
At 16:33 12/09/2000 GMT, T. Loesch wrote:
>Hi,
>
>>Now did you consider the loop impedance too ?
>
>I placed the SMD Cap's as close to the chip body as possible. I'm aware
>that the rest of the loop (actual Pins and internal connection) introduce
>notably more inductance,
OK
>but at least I made sure to have the best possible result
>within the limits imposed by not being able to use naked chips.
Yup.....
>>Very often the gnd pin and the Vss / Vdd pins are not located in
>>each-others vicinity (they should but...)
>
>In case of the CS8412 they are.
Yes
>In case of the TDA1541 it is minimised by my
>"trick" of actually wrapping the chip body in self adheasive copperfoil
>and using this as groundplane. Again, it reduces the loop impedance as
>much as mechanically possible.
The current now is allowed to run through the smallest loop; well done !
>Something that is (again) very hard to achieve using
>PCB's with only 2 layers (and anything above that is really outside the
>domain of most enthusiasts).
Yes, I know, but we used 4 layers and had very good resons......
>>And please: Place and connect the capacitors as close as possible to the
>>ground pin of the device, to avoid voltage build-up across the groundplane
>
>We are within about 6mm for the DAC. This is the best possible.
OK, no problems with that
Guido
>Later T
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: "MWP" <hirm@chariot.net.au>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:02:00 +0930
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n659
Those are good tips fellas...
Thanks a lot.
Any others ?? :)
MWP
> "J. Gordon Rankin" wrote:
> >
> > Just a note since I use these. The receiver is surface mount the filter
> > caps must ne also. Use a transformer to couple the digital in. You will
> > have to layout a board as these parts require a ground plane. If these
> > things are not done, it is hard to get a lock on the signal it will also
> > drift if these things are not adhered to.
>
> If you've got good eyesight, a steady hand, and a fine-tipped soldering
> iron, it's pretty easy to do one-offs with surface mount parts.
> Superglue the IC "dead-bug" style to a copper sheet (circuit board
> material is good), i.e. on its back with its "legs" (pins) sticking up
> in the air. Carefully and slowly bend down any pins that need to be
> grounded and solder to the copper groundplane. Use chip caps for
> bypasses by mounting them vertically, with one end soldered to the
> groundplane and the other resting on the IC pin. Make your connections
> with #30 wire, like wirewrap wire. You can use leaded parts for
> interconnections, etc.
>
> YMMV, etc.
>
> JL
>
=========================================================================
From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:07:02 GMT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n661
Hi all,
>... along the lines of your Kusunoki DAC ?
To a point.
>Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ?
Because of the many different Voltages that are required (normally) and the
absence of 5V Batteries. So you still need some regulators to get the right
voltage and these must be basically as good (noise, impulse behaviour) as
the ones in the mains powered version.
And using Nicads is pretty much out because of live expectancy and Sealed
Lead Acid units are big and heavy, often rather hard to fit as an
aftermarket mod.
Later T
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
=========================================================================
From: "Vernon Taylor" <Taylor.Vernon@ac-lyon.fr>
Subject: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:39:21 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n661
> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:11:51 GMT
> From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
> I can only second that. I'm doing just now another DAC (CS8412 & TDA1541)
> this way.
>
... along the lines of your Kusunoki DAC ?
...and for everyone :
Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ? Seems to me the incovenience of
a charger outweighs the needs of 'complex' mains-originated supplies ?
Vernon
=========================================================================
From: "Kim Bay Smidt Pedersen" <kbsp@hifi-analyse.dk>
Subject: SV: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:56:18 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n661
Hi Vernon
A Danish audio manufacture (Holfi) in fact use lead-acid maintenance free batteries in the hole high
end line of their products - including the power amps!
The top model CD-player REX contains 4 batteries and passively regulated power supply - no 3-pins re
gulators here at all! :-)
Read more: http://www.holfi.dk
/Kim
- -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: owner-sound@lists.io.com [mailto:owner-sound@lists.io.com]Pĺ vegne
af Vernon Taylor
Sendt: 14. september 2000 14:39
Til: sound@lists.io.com
Emne: [JN] DAC parts...
> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:11:51 GMT
> From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
> I can only second that. I'm doing just now another DAC (CS8412 & TDA1541)
> this way.
>
... along the lines of your Kusunoki DAC ?
...and for everyone :
Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ? Seems to me the incovenience of
a charger outweighs the needs of 'complex' mains-originated supplies ?
Vernon
=========================================================================
From: "Vernon Taylor" <Taylor.Vernon@ac-lyon.fr>
Subject: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:38:45 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n662
> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:07:02 GMT
> From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
>
> >Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ?
>
> Because of the many different Voltages that are required (normally) and
the
> absence of 5V Batteries. So you still need some regulators to get the
right
> voltage and these must be basically as good (noise, impulse behaviour) as
> the ones in the mains powered version.
What about voltage dropping resistors (if current draw is constant) ? Also,
for the Kusunoki/Convertus we can get away with 6V in most places.
>
> And using Nicads is pretty much out because of live expectancy and Sealed
> Lead Acid units are big and heavy, often rather hard to fit as an
> aftermarket mod.
>
'big and heavy' ? What about your 68,000uF beer cans ?!
Salut
Vernon
=========================================================================
From: "T. Loesch" <ezee_e@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:14:04 GMT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n662
Hi,
>What about voltage dropping resistors (if current draw is constant) ?
Current Draw in Digital Circuits cannot really be assumed to be constant.
>Also, for the Kusunoki/Convertus we can get away with 6V in most places.
Yes. But not if you do not change the Output stage resistors to lower values
and adjust the offset.
Later T
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
=========================================================================
From: "Remco Stoutjesdijk" <r.m.stoutjesdijk@student.utwente.nl>
Subject: RE: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:18:56 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n662
>
> Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ? Seems to me the
> incovenience of
> a charger outweighs the needs of 'complex' mains-originated supplies ?
>
The main source of interference in DACs is the HF switching residue of all
the ICs inside the DAC, not the mains noise. As DACs don't consume a lot of
current, it's relatively easy to build a very good PSU. So, battery power
won't help you much there.
Regards,
Remco
- --
http://listen.to/rmsaudio
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: RE: [JN] DAC parts...
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 13:04:45 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n664
Remco is correct, Batteries are slow devices, you need caps across them,
(close to the chips) at least....
Guido
IAt 11:18 15/09/2000 +0200, Remco Stoutjesdijk wrote:
>>
>> Why don't we see more battery powered DACs ? Seems to me the
>> incovenience of
>> a charger outweighs the needs of 'complex' mains-originated supplies ?
>>
>
>The main source of interference in DACs is the HF switching residue of all
>the ICs inside the DAC, not the mains noise. As DACs don't consume a lot of
>current, it's relatively easy to build a very good PSU. So, battery power
>won't help you much there.
>
>Regards,
>Remco
>--
>http://listen.to/rmsaudio
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: TubeGarden@aol.com
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:19:37 EDT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n662
Greets!
I must withdraw my name from the DAC PCB wait list.
I have purchased the Pioneer DV-333 DVD player, and their solution to the
digital sonic woes will be keeping me grinning for some time :)
Still burning in, but, the first listen to Dorian Sampler #2, a favorite, has
me relaxed about the technology, ahhhhh.
Who would have guessed anything good would come from TV add-ons?
Kismet!
Happy Ears!
Al B^}
=========================================================================
From: Power.Ralph@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:52:36 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n662
Hi Al,
BTW, I always enjoy your posts, they are fun.
If you really want to hear what the DV-333 can do, get some of those
DAD 24/96 recordings from Classic Records, or Chesky.
I just got the Ravel orchestral works on Classic DAD and the new
Water Lily Acoustics # 66, Swallish and the Philadelphia Orchestra's
Dvorak overtures, 24/96 recordings and they are audibly much
better in every way. But expensive unfortunately.....
It's also got me going on Dolby Digital and DTS CDs and videos. The
video quality of DVDs is outstanding. I'm going to set up a home theater
with a decoder and 2 stereo SET amps. I'm hearing good things about
DTS audio CDs.
My 2 cents,
- Ralph
=========================================================================
From: William Eckle <wmeckle@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:00:55 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
At 08:19 AM 09/15/2000 EDT, TubeGarden@aol.com wrote:
>I have purchased the Pioneer DV-333 DVD player, and their solution to the
>digital sonic woes will be keeping me grinning for some time :)
Hi Al:
I got a DV-333 also, my son heard it and got one too. Told my son-in-law about it and he and his
neighbor each got one. All are extremely happy with them. Oh and they play movies too.
These are discontinued models, when is the supply going to run out ?
<bold><color><param>ffff,0000,0000</param>-=Bill Eckle=-
</color></bold> wmeckle@uswest.net
<italic><color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>Phoenix, Arizona USA
</color></italic>
=========================================================================
From: William Eckle <wmeckle@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:05:34 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
At 08:52 AM 09/15/2000 -0400, Power.Ralph@epamail.epa.gov wrote:
> I'm going to set up a home theater
>with a decoder and 2 stereo SET amps.
Hi Ralph:
I'm looking for a decoder also, reasonable, have planty of amps, tuners etc. so just need a decod
er.
Any ideas ?
<bold><color><param>ffff,0000,0000</param>-=Bill Eckle=-
</color></bold> wmeckle@uswest.net
<italic><color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>Phoenix, Arizona USA
</color></italic>
=========================================================================
From: William Eckle <wmeckle@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:16:18 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
At 01:18 PM 09/15/2000 -0400, Power.Ralph@epamail.epa.gov wrote:
>Well, I've spent the last few days researching Dolby and DTS
>decoders. Practically all the inexpensive ones are built into the
>A/V receivers and most outboard decoders are VERY expensive.
>
>But I did find one reasonably priced outboard decoder, the
>Technics SHAC500D Dolby Digital/DTS processor at
>Etown for $268. It's not perfect, but does seem to have a good
>mix of features. I can use my tube amps with it and then cut it
>out of the circuit for critical stereo listening. Reviews give it a
>good sound rating, so I ordered one. I'll report back when I get it.
Hi Ralph:
Thanks for the info, I'd appreciate a report when you try the Technics.
I'd really like a selectable digital input as I have Dolby AC3 on the cable
in addition to DVD.
=-Bill Eckle=-
Vanity Web page at:
http://www.users.uswest.net/~wmeckle
=========================================================================
From: David Dlugos <planet10@pinc.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:51:38 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
>But I did find one reasonably priced outboard decoder, the
>Technics SHAC500D Dolby Digital/DTS processor at
>Etown for $268. It's not perfect, but does seem to have a good
>mix of features. I can use my tube amps with it and then cut it
>out of the circuit for critical stereo listening. Reviews give it a
>good sound rating, so I ordered one. I'll report back when I get it.
I have one of these (bought used -- the original receipt was close to a $1k
CDN so the price has come way down). It has a minimal but good feature set,
and i enjoy the HT it's in.
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/fall/system/ht.html
(the amps are now all NADs)
dave
____________________________
"The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense."
- -- Tom Clancy
=========================================================================
From: Power.Ralph@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 13:18:24 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
HI Bill,
You said :
> I'm looking for a decoder also, reasonable, have plenty of amps,
>tuners etc. so just need a decoder. Any ideas ?
Well, I've spent the last few days researching Dolby and DTS
decoders. Practically all the inexpensive ones are built into the
A/V receivers and most outboard decoders are VERY expensive.
But I did find one reasonably priced outboard decoder, the
Technics SHAC500D Dolby Digital/DTS processor at
Etown for $268. It's not perfect, but does seem to have a good
mix of features. I can use my tube amps with it and then cut it
out of the circuit for critical stereo listening. Reviews give it a
good sound rating, so I ordered one. I'll report back when I get it.
MSB makes a nice DTS only decoder (Millineum) that I've seen
for as low as $200, but I wanted Dolby Digital and surround too.
- Ralph
=========================================================================
From: Roscoe Primrose <roscoe@aiko.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC parts... defection to Pioneer DV-333
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 16:32:37 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n663
Power.Ralph@epamail.epa.gov wrote:
>
> But I did find one reasonably priced outboard decoder, the
> Technics SHAC500D Dolby Digital/DTS processor at
> Etown for $268. It's not perfect, but does seem to have a good
> mix of features. I can use my tube amps with it and then cut it
> out of the circuit for critical stereo listening. Reviews give it a
> good sound rating, so I ordered one. I'll report back when I get it.
>
I had one of these for about a year in my HT. Sounds pretty reasonable
for the price, three digital inputs, 6 channels of passthru w/o volume
control. Had to get rid of it because the wife didn't like having to
switch video & audio seperately (the HT is the only TV in the house).
I recommend it w/o hesitation. However, OneCall (
http://www.onecall.com ) has them for $255, others may be cheaper, I
don't know...
There's always a couple on e-bay too!
Peace
- --
Roscoe Primrose
- -- mailto:roscoe@aiko.com -- http://www.aiko.com/roscoe --
"Once in a while you get shown the light
In the strangest of places if you look at it right." Robert Hunter
=========================================================================
From: Remco Stoutjesdijk <remco@ultranalog.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] Dacs, supratech, phaseshift, recordings
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 17:17:43 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n902
>Is anyone keeping tabs on the various joelist contributor sites?
I'm working on it (http://www.ultranalog.com/joenet/joenet.html). It's lagging a little, for instanc
e the FTP info is not there yet. People suggesting instead of the meet 'n greet list, every Joe have
his own page. Some have already sent in pictures which I'm still processing (stupid 24 hr limit on
day is a pain in the neck). Should be there by the weekend...
>I'm happy to provide space to keep such a list, but I don't have
>the
>.cgi access to allow Joes to enter their own info.
I do and will. Have to play script kiddie some more first though.
I won't provide a whole 'my system' information, but instead link to Adnan Arduman's excellent pages
.
Regards,
Remco
- --
http://www.ultranalog.com
=========================================================================
From: Conrad Drake <conrad@directwest.iinet.net.au>
Subject: [JN] Dacs, supratech, phaseshift, recordings
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:18:29 +0800
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n902
> From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
> Subject: RE: [JN] non-oversampling DACs
> Join the advantage of buying more PCBs, either Allens', ours or
> Thorstens' !
Where? How?
Is anyone keeping tabs on the various joelist contributor sites?
a) if I'm going to spend my pesos, I'd like to see if there's a
Joe to
use
b) o'wise, I'd like to know what places people recommend.
c) I'm trying to keep up myself, but people keep moving!
I'm happy to provide space to keep such a list, but I don't have
the
.cgi access to allow Joes to enter their own info.
I can certainly try and maintain a static webpage, if there's not
already a better place for it. I guess www.soundpractices.com is
already gone! (Tho' Joe could put a redirect under a "hidden"
URL
www.soundpractices.com/private to whereever we want to stort this
semi-private info.
Speaking of which - Mike Maloney, are you around? The Cantech
email
address is bouncing.
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:23:45 -0000
> From: "Chris Vryonides" <chrisvryonides@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [JN] Correction - Phase shift, also inapplicability of fourier transform
<snip>
> One more point - I dread to think how much the phase of the original sound
> has suffered between microphones, recording, compression, EQ, mixing,
> mastering, FIR filtering in the DAC, amp, speakers, room characteristic...
My other Quest - a list of labels and/or recordings done with
"minimalist" recording styles. (JMR and Chesky come to mind as
two
current practitioners of Joe-list approved recording)
Plus a list of places where such items are actually in stock!
CD
=========================================================================
From: "P. Caillaud" <peufeu@free.fr>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC thoughts
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:09:42 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n657
- - The circuit generating SPDIF at the player side still contains lots of
jitter
1- If the clock is generated inside the DAC, jitter happening during its
transmission to the CD player is not important as long as the jitter is less
than 1/4 a clock pulse. All we need here is correct data transfer between two
digital devices, which only requires that correct levels be present at the
sampling instants.
- - Induced noise in-between player and DAC will affect the receiving end
2 - I was thinking about using optical transmission for a total decoupling.
Some say that optical sounds bad, they may be right because some receiver
photodiodes and the associated circuitery introduces jitter. However, not if the
clock is inside the DAC.
- - The data entering the DAC chips contains jitter
3 - The data entering the digital filter would. However just adding a delay
stage sync'ed with the DAC master clock at the optical input would correct this.
Jitter in the data is not important (see 1). Only jitter in clock is important.
The error in SPDIF was association Data and Clock in the same signal.
- - The noise at the digital DAC pcb may affect the clock
4 - Then the PCB would have to be designed not to. Shielding, decoupling,
etc. have to be used. This is a problem common to ALL dac's and CD players. To
minimize it, the clock must be as close as possible to the DAC.
- - The clock may contain too much jitter (in general you may need < 1ps)
5 - It depends on design again. Actually one could use a prefabricated clock
module that is sold for CD player modification with extremely low jitter.
> >> Please don't extract clock from the SPDIF signal.
> Depends on how you that
> Instead, have a stable clock inside your DAC, as physically close as
> >possible to the DAC chip itself. Then buffer the signal and send it into your
> CD
> >player or transport.
> This is an easy way to achive better quality, but requires changes in the
> CD player.
It's easier, that's why I like it. Why tackle unnecesary synchronization
problems when you can just get rid of them (low jitter PLL's are nasty to
design) and put the oscillator in the DAC. Yes, you have to butcher your CD
player... is this a problem ?
I would like to hear about the guys here who built one. Will you distribute
schematics on the Web ? I'm eager to see.
- --
_________________________
Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
peufeu@free.fr
32 Passage Gonin
69001 Lyon
France
06 61 52 75 96
04 78 43 15 94
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: Re: [JN] DAC thoughts
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:08:15 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n658
dear all,
>Guido wrote:
>>- The circuit generating SPDIF at the player side still contains lots of
>>jitter
>At 10:09 11/09/2000 +0200, P. Caillaud wrote:
> 1- If the clock is generated inside the DAC, jitter happening during its
>transmission to the CD player is not important as long as the jitter is less
>than 1/4 a clock pulse. All we need here is correct data transfer between two
>digital devices, which only requires that correct levels be present at the
>sampling instants.
NO, NO, NO
Of course you need exact data, but you also need a recovered clock:
Inside the DAC that clock will be extracted from the datastream (SPDIF).
The regular way to recover the clock is wrong as it will still contain
jitter, be it data related or not (supply induced or whatever)
If the DAC is using a free running oscillator, and feeding the DAC, no
clock recovery is needed, thoug:
The incoming data still contains jitter ! That jitter may affect the DA
conversion process due to crosstalk on the DAC
At 10:09 11/09/2000 +0200, P. Caillaud wrote:
>- Induced noise in-between player and DAC will affect the receiving end
>
> 2 - I was thinking about using optical transmission for a total
>decoupling.
That helps but introduces another problem: Most optical transmission has
too low bandwidth (and yes, jitter is the result)
>Some say that optical sounds bad, they may be right because some receiver
>photodiodes and the associated circuitery introduces jitter. However, not
if >the clock is inside the DAC.
Partly true, see above
At 10:09 11/09/2000 +0200, P. Caillaud wrote:
>- The data entering the DAC chips contains jitter
>
> 3 - The data entering the digital filter would.
Yes, as well
>However just adding a delay stage sync'ed with the DAC master clock at the
>optical input would correct this.
Sufficient ?
>Jitter in the data is not important (see 1). Only jitter in clock is
>important.
All what counts is Low jitter at the moment of conversion. More is needed
than a low jitter clock as crostalk mechanisms are present on chip
I have seen many aspects of silicon design as an EMC engineer within
Philips. Please follow my remarks, they are based on measurements,
simulations (at Philips) and listening test at home.
Ever considered that the difference in voltage in-between PCB ground and
Substrate (on-silicon) exceeds 100 mV ? Wonder how you keep your clock
clean ? Wonder how to generate low jitter data signals ?
> The error in SPDIF was association Data and Clock in the same signal.
It is not an error, it is an agreement to come to a universal interface. It
is possible to reconstruct a clock without data related jitter out of the
SPDIF signal, only few know how (and Crystal has made a chip for it !)
>- The noise at the digital DAC pcb may affect the clock
>
> 4 - Then the PCB would have to be designed not to. Shielding, decoupling,
>etc. have to be used. This is a problem common to ALL dac's and CD players.
Yes, but economocal aspects play a role. Ever seen a commercial DAC with a
4 layer PCB ? Believe me, you need 4 layers to maintain the required
performance
>To minimize it, the clock must be as close as possible to the DAC.
That helps, yes
>- The clock may contain too much jitter (in general you may need < 1ps)
>
> 5 - It depends on design again.
Some DACs are more sensitive, yes
>Actually one could use a prefabricated clock
>module that is sold for CD player modification with extremely low jitter.
I sell these at a normal price (I rejected over 20 oscillators of various
manufacturers)
>> >> Please don't extract clock from the SPDIF signal.
>
>> Depends on how you that
>
>> Instead, have a stable clock inside your DAC, as physically close as
>> >possible to the DAC chip itself. Then buffer the signal and send it
into >>your CD player or transport.
That avoids problems of PLL but introduces a different interface
>> This is an easy way to achive better quality, but requires changes in the
>> CD player.
>
> It's easier, that's why I like it. Why tackle unnecesary synchronization
>problems when you can just get rid of them (low jitter PLL's are nasty to
>design) and put the oscillator in the DAC. Yes, you have to butcher your CD
>player... is this a problem ?
Not to me, but to many others yes
> I would like to hear about the guys here who built one.
There are about 30 people in Holland who built it
>Will you distribute schematics on the Web ?
Yes
>I'm eager to see.
be patient a little while....
Have fun
Guido
>--
>_________________________
>
>Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
>peufeu@free.fr
>32 Passage Gonin
>69001 Lyon
>France
>
>06 61 52 75 96
>04 78 43 15 94
>
>
>
>
=========================================================================
From: "St. Cinnamon" <ram@ispnook.com>
Subject: [JN] dact stepped attenuator
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:40:06 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n411
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BF6397.4C904CC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am looking for some feedback on the Danish audio connect (dact) =
stepped attenuators. I'm presently using a noble pot in a choke loaded =
26 pre. If anyone is presently using or has had experience with the =
dact, could you please pass on your findings.
thanks,
Ritchie
=20
- ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BF6397.4C904CC0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am looking for some feedback on the =
Danish audio=20
connect (dact) stepped attenuators. I'm presently using a noble pot in a =
choke=20
loaded 26 pre. If anyone is presently using or has had experience with =
the dact,=20
could you please pass on your findings.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ritchie</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BF6397.4C904CC0--
=========================================================================
From: evaguido <EvaGuido@iaehv.nl>
Subject: [JN] DAC update !
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:53:24 +0200
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n873
dear all,
At our website
http://members.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/DAChtml/dactop.htm
an update can be found:
http://members.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/DAChtml/DAC%20update.htm
regarding the ordering of components like DAC chips, PCBs and some more.
Have fun
best regards
- -
Guido
=========================================================================
From: "PEARL Cust Serv" <custserv@pearl-hifi.com>
Subject: [JN] Re: damp cloth vs. carbon fiber brush (vs. DAMP CF brush)
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 14:40:07 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n062
Martin <mmm@angel.net wrote:
> I bought an audioquest carbon fiber brush from the the good Disc Doctor,
> and I was distinctly unimpressed. I have a hundred watt bulb about 2 feet
> from my turntable, and after running the carbon fiber brush over the vinyl
> there was always a residue of dust. So I returned to my previous method of
> removing dust, which IMHO is far superior: I use a plastic spray bottle
> loaded with purified water, and I mist water onto a soft paper towel. I
> wipe the damp paper towel over my records and all the dust comes off. When
> the paper towel gets saturated with dust it stops cleaning effectively, so
> I throw it away use a new paper towel.
>
> Martin <mmm@angel.net>
_______________________________________
Hi Martin:
My experience with dry brushes is like yours and I use a similar
"solution", except: I mist the brush and clean the record that way.
The brush will penetrate into the grooves better than a paper towel and
is easily cleaned from time to time using 'Joy' dishwashing liquid. . . not
Ivory, not Sunlight, not what-have-you but 'Joy' - >> without additives <<
This particular soap leaves behind almost >> no << residues.
I've used this method for almost 20 years, my records are in great shape
and I'm on only my 2nd ( ! ! ) brush. . .
Happy Trails,
Bill - PEARL
=========================================================================
From: David Home <DHome@creo.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Re: damp cloth vs. carbon fiber brush (vs. DAMP CF brush )
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:01:36 -0800
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n062
In my experience, One drop of Kodak 'Photoflow' film wetting agent to one
liter of water seems to help the water 'wet' to areas that have a oil film
on them. A bet a tiny pinhead drop of that Joy detergant would do as well.
Regards,
David Home
Plate Qualification Specialist
Creo Products Inc.,
4225 Kincaid Street,
Burnaby, British Columbia,
Canada, V5G 4P5
Tel. 604.451.2720 Ex. 2397
Fax. 604.437.9891
Email: dhome@creo.com <mailto:dhome@creo.com>
Website:www.creo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: PEARL Cust Serv [mailto:custserv@pearl-hifi.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 1999 1:40 PM
To: analogue.addicts@analogueaddicts.free-online.co.uk;
sound@lists.io.com
Subject: [JN] Re: damp cloth vs. carbon fiber brush
(vs. DAMP CF brush)
Martin <mmm@angel.net wrote:
> I bought an audioquest carbon fiber brush from the the
good Disc Doctor,
> and I was distinctly unimpressed. I have a hundred watt
bulb about 2 feet
> from my turntable, and after running the carbon fiber
brush over the vinyl
> there was always a residue of dust. So I returned to my
previous method of
> removing dust, which IMHO is far superior: I use a
plastic spray bottle
> loaded with purified water, and I mist water onto a soft
paper towel. I
> wipe the damp paper towel over my records and all the dust
comes off. When
> the paper towel gets saturated with dust it stops cleaning
effectively, so
> I throw it away use a new paper towel.
>
> Martin <mmm@angel.net>
_______________________________________
Hi Martin:
My experience with dry brushes is like yours and I use a
similar
"solution", except: I mist the brush and clean the record
that way.
The brush will penetrate into the grooves better than a
paper towel and
is easily cleaned from time to time using 'Joy' dishwashing
liquid. . . not
Ivory, not Sunlight, not what-have-you but 'Joy' - >>
without additives <<
This particular soap leaves behind almost >> no << residues.
I've used this method for almost 20 years, my records
are in great shape
and I'm on only my 2nd ( ! ! ) brush. . .
Happy Trails,
Bill - PEARL
=========================================================================
From: Simon Busbridge <S.C.Busbridge@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: [JN] Damper diode for soft starts
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 16:34:10 +0000 (GMT)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n829
Hello All,
Would somebody please be able to suggest a suitable damper diode for soft
starting my 833 amp? The rectifiers are U19 and they grunt if switched
full on at once. The damper diode would go in the ground connection to
the negative grid and needs to withstand about 3 kV when cold and pass
some 0.5 A when running. The warm up time should be as long as possible.
TIA
Simon
Simon Busbridge, BSc(Hons) PhD CPhys MInstP
School of Engineering
University of Brighton
Lewes Road
Moulsecoomb
Brighton BN2 4GJ
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel: 0044 (0)1273 642542
Fax: 0044 (0)1273 642327/642301
e-mail: s.c.busbridge@bton.ac.uk, scbusbridge@hotmail.com
=========================================================================
From: thomas.mayer@philips.com
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diode for soft starts
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 10:30:28 +0100
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n830
Hi Simon,
> Would somebody please be able to suggest a suitable damper diode for soft
> starting my 833 amp? The rectifiers are U19 and they grunt if switched
> full on at once. The damper diode would go in the ground connection to
> the negative grid and needs to withstand about 3 kV when cold and pass
> some 0.5 A when running. The warm up time should be as long as possible.
I know a Damper diode which comes close to your requirement. The
6EC4. It has a max average current of 440 mA. The 42EC4 is the same
with a different heater. As far as I know this is the "heaviest"
TV Damper.
Thomas
=========================================================================
From: "Chris Beck" <cbeck@brewercompany.com>
Subject: [JN] Damper Diodes
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 13:33:27 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n055
When looking at the specs for a damper diode, if it's rated for 175mA DC
for a single tube, can I take that as being able to put out 350mA for two
in a full wave circuit??? I can get my hands on a nice stash of 6W4's and
was thinking of using them.
Chris Beck
See my web page at: http://www.execpc.com/~n9zes/index.htm
=========================================================================
From: Mark Donen <mdonen@bu.edu>
Subject: [JN] damper diodes?
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:52:50 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n607
Hi
Are there any damper diodes that have close characteristics any the usual
suspect 5V rectifiers? I remember jc being real on about them, but I forgot
why exactly ...
Thanks for any info
Mark
begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
M>)\^(C,7`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`
M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`0V ! `"`````@`"``$$
MD 8`G $```$````0`````P``, (````+``\.``````(!_P\!````:0``````
M``"U.\+ +'<0&J&\" `K*E;"%0```&L@"&7NV+X1I7 V#?"ES%$DE ``````
M`($K'Z2^HQ 9G6X`W0$/5 (`````2F]E3F5T`%--5% `<V]U;F1 9&5L:79E
M<F%T;W(N:6\N8V]M`````!X``C !````!0```%--5% `````'@`#, $````9
M````<V]U;F1 9&5L:79E<F%T;W(N:6\N8V]M``````,`%0P!`````P#^#P8`
M```>``$P`0````D````G2F]E3F5T)P`````"`0LP`0```!X```!33510.E-/
M54Y$0$1%3$E615)!5$]2+DE/+D-/30````,``#D`````"P! .@$````>`/9?
M`0````<```!*;V5.970```(!]U\!````+ ```+\```"U.\+ +'<0&J&\" `K
M*E;"%0```&L@"&7NV+X1I7 V#?"ES%$DE ```P#]7P$````#`/]?``````(!
M]@\!````! ````````(85 $$@ $`#P```&1A;7!E<B!D:6]D97,_`% %`06
M`P`.````T <'`!0`$P`T`#(`! !O`0$@@ ,`#@```- '!P`4`!,`+P`5``0`
M30$!"8 !`"$```!!.$,R03)$,#4V1C)"1C$Q034W,#,V,$1&,$$U0T,U,0`T
M!P$#D 8`= @``" ````+``(``0````L`(P```````P`F```````+`"D`````
M``,`-@``````0 `Y`*"YW)RE\K\!'@!P``$````/````9&%M<&5R(&1I;V1E
M<S\```(!<0`!````%@````&_\J6<LX<R)"1>*!'4D8!$15-4`````!X`'@P!
M````!0```%--5% `````'@`?# $````.````;61O;F5N0&)U+F5D=0````,`
M!A!:-C*\`P`'$)P````>``@0`0```&4```!(24%2151(15)%04Y91$%-4$52
M1$E/1$535$A!5$A!5D5#3$]314-(05)!0U1%4DE35$E#4T%.651(155354%,
M4U534$5#5#564D5#5$E&24524S])4D5-14U"15)*0T)%24Y'``````(!"1 !
M````<P4``&\%``!P#0``3%I&=8Z?7SL#``H`<F-P9S$R-7(R#&!C,0,P`0<+
M8&Z1#A P,S,/%F9E#Y)/`?<"I -C`@!C: K <X1E= +1<')Q,@``DBH*H6YO
M$E @, '0A0'0-@^@,#4P-!0A\P'0%! T?0=M`H,`4 /4^Q'_$PMB$^$44!.R
M&/04T(L'$Q7D-Q&.,C,X%U3B( =M($-%%>0;D1J=YQ1 &Z\<M7ER`H,,`1&=
M7#$V%C$>_P."1PG1:[\@=!8Q(0X.4"(O`W-4"'!G('0E82$-.#8E?QRT0OT'
M0'0-X"!T#\ 671MX!Q/]'08R'L$K'1ZW+)4@5BBA_Q9L(>@LE".)&F$P3B5F
M+)3_)N<;D3!-*)<LE"HF`I$(YJH["6\P.+]E#C U.>K_.P$ZOSO).=0[\CI?
M/B\][?\];SN?.>\08#5@0[I$T42/_T69.=1%PD0O1_]'O4<_16_]230Y#E!,
MA$WA1@--X *"4'-T>6P'D&@)X'2'```34 /P9&-T; JQPEQ0.&%D:G5/4 40
MW&=H!4(6,@P!8PG 4$#A`S!S;F5X%S 'L 6PRP# `G-S`%!S8BU@`4"D<V$3
M\%QK">!P"Y!?4!]0@PA@4' +@&5/@';_5T !0%%[##!21!N052 $H$T+@&<U
M85+&8F$7$&0_`B!3@%,F3[!1<%EQ(#'_3Q,.4%1_58]6GP!15]P`H/]23EI?
M6V9/! _ 7&]=?UZ/WPY05\]@[V'_6Y,S`H(3$'YC5$!I@5%P6Y J4%=P())$
M`1!A=2I (% *P()A"<!A<&@@1@(AHU0$0R!F:2T/D#@!0*]7$&X39.]0@V(+
M('()4&=P,A:@<#)W-$,A%P!P_P'0:U)1GVA_:89ML&QP!1"M`C M;1 #83HI
M$&]UD%!3=6)J!9!T=9!$\&%T93I4!"BA;?]O#_]P'W$O<C=/H%N##B%I@5B6
M-PY0<T]T7E)781<!($C_6W$$D%0$&F%W;WA_>8]ZFU]6[WN?#Y"'4 C08@JP
M=/XX9]H/5"UA?:]T58?@?[!Y"U!Y+VT@>I +$8 E<_]4!!N1@2^"/X-/>I]R
M/XE/WXI?BV1ULG54=HDYC9]1'SL#,(>3.9%_DH^8@$1O_&-U!X ", 70;. W
MX9:R[Y80EE"/,0& ;G80`& )\-]K@)K@`@%3P'PR90#PFN E3V!P/&!<=@B0
M=VO]"X!D'L">@@3P!T 080% WPX`CP);8I_E`A!O!4(7(3L2\G:@;0M1=J =
M`#I<ZEQTX&]LP6UM$ ,0!Y!-HI!-#> #8'-O`8 @KD\!( W@G=!<I$9%`,#U
M`Q N:5!TF[ 7$)904P'MA5)X`4"<X6Y/L#C0I>0];!1C`R 2\P" !9!L=O]?
M@62P#G!3P*AR`9 `(*D"_Y[1FR$!P:AQ%N /< ``9+#S#- !D" N-_*H: Y0
MJ2+_*D"6H*F?JJ^KOP_ 9+ %@;>M7ZYOKW]L'L!DL&RM'_NQW[+E*:OL0R"P
MO[6?LM3X8B H`I&VOZBS**"T;_^Y+[H_NT^HX!I@O)*I;[W__[\/J^P;D+R?
MPA_#+\0_J.#_E>#!'\:OQ[_(Q KY`S"6#^.7'YBM>TAI"H4*A0<0%1. =*<2
M( !P>2!D_Z,`GD %P%N0!'$$(-+ =I#]6U!A:]&H$!-B%M(`T':@OP403U -
MX 0@TR+2P2#/\!YU+,'6T)!@=C$@-58>(#C0SK &D B1<S\@'DG7P0> !M#3
MH6IC(/_9`%NB.- LP0(@TQ &X(4P>=*R;2S98-J!V)"=46?YH2%W:-- `I!3
M4-6!BQ#5W!&%T:Q4LH%K!""=4?_3$PN `A#1K J%S83.3\]?)05 >YM@<FO?
MYGT``@#C\ `#`! 0``````,`$1 ``````P" $/____] ``<PH'(&V:3ROP%
M``@PH'(&V:3ROP$+``" "" &``````# ````````1@`````#A0````````,`
M`H (( 8``````, ```````!&`````!"%`````````P`%@ @@!@``````P ``
M`````$8`````4H4``+<-```>`"6 "" &``````# ````````1@````!4A0``
M`0````0````X+C ``P`F@ @@!@``````P ```````$8``````84````````+
M`"^ "" &``````# ````````1@`````.A0````````,`,( (( 8``````, `
M``````!&`````!&%`````````P`R@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````&(4`
M```````>`$& "" &``````# ````````1@`````VA0```0````$`````````
M'@!"@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````-X4```$````!`````````!X`0X (
M( 8``````, ```````!&`````#B%```!`````0`````````>`#T``0````$`
0`````````P`--/TW```\AP``
`
end
=========================================================================
From: "Epstein, Jeremy" <JEpstein@ndbcap.com>
Subject: [JN] damper diodes
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 10:20:32 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
I have gotten good results from the 6BY5GTA which is a dual diode, so you
only need one. Like the sought-after 5AR4, it is indirectly heated so it
warms up slowly, which is nice. It also means you only need one 6.3V heater
winding for B+ and audio heater duities as long as it is capable of
delivering the current. It's a chubby octal bottle.
The reason jc is on about them, I think, is a) they are usually cheap and b)
they are often pretty low-impedance.
- -j
=========================================
Jeremy Epstein........jepstein@ndbcap.com
=========================================
=========================================================================
From: Larry Moore <c40rally@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [JN] damper diodes
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 10:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
As Dave wrote and I attempt to clarify hereinafter;
> C) they are designed to do as their name implies...
> damp... (loosely from
> jc...they were used in hv supplies in TV's where any
> back spike of voltage
> would be problematic, so they were designed to damp
> this spike.)
Televisions have high voltage on both horizontal and
vertical defection plates in the picture tube.
Thusly, the potential on these plates is used to
direct a stream of electron emission. The electron
stream in turn impacts a phosphorus coating on the
inside of the viewing screen causing it to glow. We
then watch in glazed eyed stupor, this glowing.
Now that I've commented on society, the aforementioned
beam is driven by the deflection plates across the
screen much like you are reading this text. When the
end is reached, the electron stream must go back to
start the presentation of the next screen. This is
called "flyback." Obviously this flyback must be done
such that there isn't any parasetic emission which
hits the coating on the inside of the viewing screen.
Thus, diode dampeners were used in these supplies as I
understand it. Thus, they were and are graceful if
you will. Just what jc wanted in a power supply.
Hope that helps,
L.D. Moore
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
=========================================================================
From: Richard C Nevill <rnevill@is.dal.ca>
Subject: Re: [JN] damper diodes?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 11:24:56 -0300 (ADT)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
This is a interesting question for me. If I want to use a 5V rectifier in
the power supply then that seems to me you have to rig up a 5volt supply
for it. Using a standard 6.3V would seem a lot easier.
Cheers
Richard Nevill
On Thu, 20 Jul 2000, Mark Donen wrote:
> Hi
>
> Are there any damper diodes that have close characteristics any the usual
> suspect 5V rectifiers? I remember jc being real on about them, but I forgot
> why exactly ...
>
> Thanks for any info
>
>
> Mark
>
> begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
> M>)\^(C,7`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`
> M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`0V ! `"`````@`"``$$
> MD 8`G $```$````0`````P``, (````+``\.``````(!_P\!````:0``````
> M``"U.\+ +'<0&J&\" `K*E;"%0```&L@"&7NV+X1I7 V#?"ES%$DE ``````
> M`($K'Z2^HQ 9G6X`W0$/5 (`````2F]E3F5T`%--5% `<V]U;F1 9&5L:79E
> M<F%T;W(N:6\N8V]M`````!X``C !````!0```%--5% `````'@`#, $````9
> M````<V]U;F1 9&5L:79E<F%T;W(N:6\N8V]M``````,`%0P!`````P#^#P8`
> M```>``$P`0````D````G2F]E3F5T)P`````"`0LP`0```!X```!33510.E-/
> M54Y$0$1%3$E615)!5$]2+DE/+D-/30````,``#D`````"P! .@$````>`/9?
> M`0````<```!*;V5.970```(!]U\!````+ ```+\```"U.\+ +'<0&J&\" `K
> M*E;"%0```&L@"&7NV+X1I7 V#?"ES%$DE ```P#]7P$````#`/]?``````(!
> M]@\!````! ````````(85 $$@ $`#P```&1A;7!E<B!D:6]D97,_`% %`06
> M`P`.````T <'`!0`$P`T`#(`! !O`0$@@ ,`#@```- '!P`4`!,`+P`5``0`
> M30$!"8 !`"$```!!.$,R03)$,#4V1C)"1C$Q034W,#,V,$1&,$$U0T,U,0`T
> M!P$#D 8`= @``" ````+``(``0````L`(P```````P`F```````+`"D`````
> M``,`-@``````0 `Y`*"YW)RE\K\!'@!P``$````/````9&%M<&5R(&1I;V1E
> M<S\```(!<0`!````%@````&_\J6<LX<R)"1>*!'4D8!$15-4`````!X`'@P!
> M````!0```%--5% `````'@`?# $````.````;61O;F5N0&)U+F5D=0````,`
> M!A!:-C*\`P`'$)P````>``@0`0```&4```!(24%2151(15)%04Y91$%-4$52
> M1$E/1$535$A!5$A!5D5#3$]314-(05)!0U1%4DE35$E#4T%.651(155354%,
> M4U534$5#5#564D5#5$E&24524S])4D5-14U"15)*0T)%24Y'``````(!"1 !
> M````<P4``&\%``!P#0``3%I&=8Z?7SL#``H`<F-P9S$R-7(R#&!C,0,P`0<+
> M8&Z1#A P,S,/%F9E#Y)/`?<"I -C`@!C: K <X1E= +1<')Q,@``DBH*H6YO
> M$E @, '0A0'0-@^@,#4P-!0A\P'0%! T?0=M`H,`4 /4^Q'_$PMB$^$44!.R
> M&/04T(L'$Q7D-Q&.,C,X%U3B( =M($-%%>0;D1J=YQ1 &Z\<M7ER`H,,`1&=
> M7#$V%C$>_P."1PG1:[\@=!8Q(0X.4"(O`W-4"'!G('0E82$-.#8E?QRT0OT'
> M0'0-X"!T#\ 671MX!Q/]'08R'L$K'1ZW+)4@5BBA_Q9L(>@LE".)&F$P3B5F
> M+)3_)N<;D3!-*)<LE"HF`I$(YJH["6\P.+]E#C U.>K_.P$ZOSO).=0[\CI?
> M/B\][?\];SN?.>\08#5@0[I$T42/_T69.=1%PD0O1_]'O4<_16_]230Y#E!,
> MA$WA1@--X *"4'-T>6P'D&@)X'2'```34 /P9&-T; JQPEQ0.&%D:G5/4 40
> MW&=H!4(6,@P!8PG 4$#A`S!S;F5X%S 'L 6PRP# `G-S`%!S8BU@`4"D<V$3
> M\%QK">!P"Y!?4!]0@PA@4' +@&5/@';_5T !0%%[##!21!N052 $H$T+@&<U
> M85+&8F$7$&0_`B!3@%,F3[!1<%EQ(#'_3Q,.4%1_58]6GP!15]P`H/]23EI?
> M6V9/! _ 7&]=?UZ/WPY05\]@[V'_6Y,S`H(3$'YC5$!I@5%P6Y J4%=P())$
> M`1!A=2I (% *P()A"<!A<&@@1@(AHU0$0R!F:2T/D#@!0*]7$&X39.]0@V(+
> M('()4&=P,A:@<#)W-$,A%P!P_P'0:U)1GVA_:89ML&QP!1"M`C M;1 #83HI
> M$&]UD%!3=6)J!9!T=9!$\&%T93I4!"BA;?]O#_]P'W$O<C=/H%N##B%I@5B6
> M-PY0<T]T7E)781<!($C_6W$$D%0$&F%W;WA_>8]ZFU]6[WN?#Y"'4 C08@JP
> M=/XX9]H/5"UA?:]T58?@?[!Y"U!Y+VT@>I +$8 E<_]4!!N1@2^"/X-/>I]R
> M/XE/WXI?BV1ULG54=HDYC9]1'SL#,(>3.9%_DH^8@$1O_&-U!X ", 70;. W
> MX9:R[Y80EE"/,0& ;G80`& )\-]K@)K@`@%3P'PR90#PFN E3V!P/&!<=@B0
> M=VO]"X!D'L">@@3P!T 080% WPX`CP);8I_E`A!O!4(7(3L2\G:@;0M1=J =
> M`#I<ZEQTX&]LP6UM$ ,0!Y!-HI!-#> #8'-O`8 @KD\!( W@G=!<I$9%`,#U
> M`Q N:5!TF[ 7$)904P'MA5)X`4"<X6Y/L#C0I>0];!1C`R 2\P" !9!L=O]?
> M@62P#G!3P*AR`9 `(*D"_Y[1FR$!P:AQ%N /< ``9+#S#- !D" N-_*H: Y0
> MJ2+_*D"6H*F?JJ^KOP_ 9+ %@;>M7ZYOKW]L'L!DL&RM'_NQW[+E*:OL0R"P
> MO[6?LM3X8B H`I&VOZBS**"T;_^Y+[H_NT^HX!I@O)*I;[W__[\/J^P;D+R?
> MPA_#+\0_J.#_E>#!'\:OQ[_(Q KY`S"6#^.7'YBM>TAI"H4*A0<0%1. =*<2
> M( !P>2!D_Z,`GD %P%N0!'$$(-+ =I#]6U!A:]&H$!-B%M(`T':@OP403U -
> MX 0@TR+2P2#/\!YU+,'6T)!@=C$@-58>(#C0SK &D B1<S\@'DG7P0> !M#3
> MH6IC(/_9`%NB.- LP0(@TQ &X(4P>=*R;2S98-J!V)"=46?YH2%W:-- `I!3
> M4-6!BQ#5W!&%T:Q4LH%K!""=4?_3$PN `A#1K J%S83.3\]?)05 >YM@<FO?
> MYGT``@#C\ `#`! 0``````,`$1 ``````P" $/____] ``<PH'(&V:3ROP%
> M``@PH'(&V:3ROP$+``" "" &``````# ````````1@`````#A0````````,`
> M`H (( 8``````, ```````!&`````!"%`````````P`%@ @@!@``````P ``
> M`````$8`````4H4``+<-```>`"6 "" &``````# ````````1@````!4A0``
> M`0````0````X+C ``P`F@ @@!@``````P ```````$8``````84````````+
> M`"^ "" &``````# ````````1@`````.A0````````,`,( (( 8``````, `
> M``````!&`````!&%`````````P`R@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````&(4`
> M```````>`$& "" &``````# ````````1@`````VA0```0````$`````````
> M'@!"@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````-X4```$````!`````````!X`0X (
> M( 8``````, ```````!&`````#B%```!`````0`````````>`#T``0````$`
> 0`````````P`--/TW```\AP``
> `
> end
>
>
=========================================================================
From: dslagle@earthlink.net (dave slagle)
Subject: Re: [JN] damper diodes
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:46:03 -0400
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
>The reason jc is on about them, I think, is a) they are usually cheap and b)
>they are often pretty low-impedance.
C) they are designed to do as their name implies... damp... (loosely from
jc...they were used in hv supplies in TV's where any back spike of voltage
would be problematic, so they were designed to damp this spike.) i
probably butchered it, but i have never seen any other reference to this,
he also stated that the 5Ar4 was designed after the damper model...
dave
=========================================================================
From: David Crittle <retrovox@bigpond.com>
Subject: [JN] damper diodes?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:47:17 +1000
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n608
>From: Mark Donen <mdonen@bu.edu>
>Are there any damper diodes that have close characteristics any the usual
>suspect 5V rectifiers? I remember jc being real on about them, but I forgot
>why exactly ...
First difference is that most damper diodes are a single diode, and most
commonly used rectifiers are twin with common cathode. eg 5AR5, 5R4, 5Y3
etc. So for a convential centre-tapped full wave rectifier suppky you would
need two tubes. Also some damper diodes use a top cap anode connection.
critter
=========================================================================
From: "Mai, Jeff" <Jeff.Mai@sunmed.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:19:06 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n791
Bart,
I believe a 6CJ3 would work (no doubt someone will correct me if I'm
mistaken.) 5500PIV, 1200ma max, 350ma continuous. Antique Electronic
Supply ( http://tubesandmore.com ) has (had?) them on sale for $1.90 each.
Can't beat that with a stick! It uses a 9 pin Novar socket. The nice
ceramic 9 pin Magnoval socket that Antique sells fits, but the pins are held
so loosely they rattle.
Jeff
On Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:59 PM, Bart Shepherd (Home)
[SMTP:bart.s@bigpond.net.au] wrote:
> Can anyone please identify some alternatives for me for damper diodes to
use
> in a bridge formation to handle up to 1,600V A/C and up to about 300 or
> 400ma?
>
> Can you also please suggest a source(s)?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Bart
=========================================================================
From: "Mai, Jeff" <Jeff.Mai@sunmed.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:51:40 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n791
Hmmmmmmmmm...
I just ran a few tests with the PSUD II software and I had no problems with
a 6DE4 FWB at 1600VAC and a 220u cap after the 10H choke *if* I altered the
source impedance of the transformer to a reasonable value. The 31 ohms it
uses as a default is quite low unless you're seriously derating the trans
for this application. With a value of 100 ohms (which is still pretty low)
it sails through without problems.
Note that the 6DE4 is only rated for 175ma continuous, which is why I
recommended the 6CJ3. Then there is the 6D22S.
Jeff
On Wednesday, January 24, 2001 1:24 PM, Rick Francis
[SMTP:rfrancis@glasscity.net] wrote:
> Bart,
> I used some pretty hefty ones (6DE4/6DQ4) in a FWB with a mere 800vac,
drawing
> around 250madc with a choke input filter (resulting B+ of ~670), and STILL
the
> PSUD II software showed it was quite easy with seemingly reasonable cap
values
> to exceed either the PIV of 5500 or the current capacity of 1.1A. For
that
> reason I am skeptical that even the higher current ones, such as 6CJ3, can
be
> used as you intend without exceeding ratings.
>
> There's a reason why we have 866's and 872's! If you don't like mercury,
there
> are alternatives. I think 1616 is one.
>
> Those little bitty SS diodes start to look better, don't they? :)
>
> Good luck!
>
> Rick
>
> "Bart Shepherd (Home)" wrote:
>
> > Can anyone please identify some alternatives for me for damper diodes to
use
> > in a bridge formation to handle up to 1,600V A/C and up to about 300 or
> > 400ma?
> >
> > Can you also please suggest a source(s)?
> >
> > Many thanks,
> >
> > Bart
=========================================================================
From: Rick Francis <rfrancis@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:24:27 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n791
Bart,
I used some pretty hefty ones (6DE4/6DQ4) in a FWB with a mere 800vac, drawing
around 250madc with a choke input filter (resulting B+ of ~670), and STILL the
PSUD II software showed it was quite easy with seemingly reasonable cap values
to exceed either the PIV of 5500 or the current capacity of 1.1A. For that
reason I am skeptical that even the higher current ones, such as 6CJ3, can be
used as you intend without exceeding ratings.
There's a reason why we have 866's and 872's! If you don't like mercury, there
are alternatives. I think 1616 is one.
Those little bitty SS diodes start to look better, don't they? :)
Good luck!
Rick
"Bart Shepherd (Home)" wrote:
> Can anyone please identify some alternatives for me for damper diodes to use
> in a bridge formation to handle up to 1,600V A/C and up to about 300 or
> 400ma?
>
> Can you also please suggest a source(s)?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Bart
=========================================================================
From: Rick Francis <rfrancis@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:08:49 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n791
Jeff,
You're right. I probably should have mentioned that I was using PSUD II to model
with specific transformers and chokes, and. I specifically picked low DCR
components. YES, this *is* critical to whether or not ratings (including that
big PIV!) will be exceeded. Believe me, I tried lots of values! The source
impedance of the transformer I'm using is about 50 ohms and it's big, but it is
rated at a fairly modest 275ma. The 3 chokes, even the input choke, are 25 ohms
or less. Hey I think I know why Dave Slagle eats up his MV tubes!
But a transformer that can easily deliver 400ma may well have a lower source
impedance than mine, so I think Bart would do well to let the software blow
stuff up first. : ) I've got some bruisers that measure secondary DCR of under
ten ohms.
Rick
"Mai, Jeff" wrote:
> Hmmmmmmmmm...
>
> I just ran a few tests with the PSUD II software and I had no problems with
> a 6DE4 FWB at 1600VAC and a 220u cap after the 10H choke *if* I altered the
> source impedance of the transformer to a reasonable value. The 31 ohms it
> uses as a default is quite low unless you're seriously derating the trans
> for this application. With a value of 100 ohms (which is still pretty low)
> it sails through without problems.
>
> Note that the 6DE4 is only rated for 175ma continuous, which is why I
> recommended the 6CJ3. Then there is the 6D22S.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Wednesday, January 24, 2001 1:24 PM, Rick Francis
> [SMTP:rfrancis@glasscity.net] wrote:
> > Bart,
> > I used some pretty hefty ones (6DE4/6DQ4) in a FWB with a mere 800vac,
> drawing
> > around 250madc with a choke input filter (resulting B+ of ~670), and STILL
> the
> > PSUD II software showed it was quite easy with seemingly reasonable cap
> values
> > to exceed either the PIV of 5500 or the current capacity of 1.1A. For
> that
> > reason I am skeptical that even the higher current ones, such as 6CJ3, can
> be
> > used as you intend without exceeding ratings.
> >
> > There's a reason why we have 866's and 872's! If you don't like mercury,
> there
> > are alternatives. I think 1616 is one.
> >
> > Those little bitty SS diodes start to look better, don't they? :)
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Rick
> >
> > "Bart Shepherd (Home)" wrote:
> >
> > > Can anyone please identify some alternatives for me for damper diodes to
> use
> > > in a bridge formation to handle up to 1,600V A/C and up to about 300 or
> > > 400ma?
> > >
> > > Can you also please suggest a source(s)?
> > >
> > > Many thanks,
> > >
> > > Bart
=========================================================================
From: "Bart Shepherd \(Home\)" <bart.s@bigpond.net.au>
Subject: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 06:59:28 +1100
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n791
Can anyone please identify some alternatives for me for damper diodes to use
in a bridge formation to handle up to 1,600V A/C and up to about 300 or
400ma?
Can you also please suggest a source(s)?
Many thanks,
Bart
=========================================================================
From: "Mai, Jeff" <Jeff.Mai@sunmed.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:50:36 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
Oops,
> > I believe a 6CJ3 would work (no doubt someone will correct me if I'm
> > mistaken.) 5500PIV, 1200ma max, 350ma continuous.
>
> 6CJ3 Peak current maximum rating is 2100mA, according to GE essensial
> characteristics.
I got my info from the web. Looks like a transposition of characters. I'd
be inclined to trust the GE number.
> Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
What happens on a hot start? I believe the PSUD II software does it's
calculations assuming the rectifier filaments are already at operating temp
when the B+ switches on. Is this what you mean by hot?
Jeff
=========================================================================
From: Dan Kerl <dlkerl@knology.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:22:31 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
"Mai, Jeff" wrote:
>
> Bart,
>
> I believe a 6CJ3 would work (no doubt someone will correct me if I'm
> mistaken.) 5500PIV, 1200ma max, 350ma continuous.
6CJ3 Peak current maximum rating is 2100mA, according to GE essensial
characteristics.
Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
- --
Dan Kerl
dlkerl@knology.net
=========================================================================
From: dslagle@earthlink.net (dave slagle)
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:31:21 -0500
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
>6CJ3 Peak current maximum rating is 2100mA, according to GE essensial
>characteristics.
>
>Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
aren't all the dampers indirectly heated?
does PSUII allow for the slow warmup consideration of a rectifier?
if you let the damper warm up and then whack it you may have a problem,
but if you let the damper do the turnon, how ar you gonna get anything
other than a slow ramp up?
dave
=========================================================================
From: "Mai, Jeff" <Jeff.Mai@sunmed.com>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:39:38 -0700
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
Rick,
> You're right. I probably should have mentioned that I was using PSUD II to
model
> with specific transformers and chokes, and. I specifically picked low DCR
> components. YES, this *is* critical to whether or not ratings (including
that
> big PIV!) will be exceeded. Believe me, I tried lots of values! The
source
> impedance of the transformer I'm using is about 50 ohms and it's big, but
it is
> rated at a fairly modest 275ma. The 3 chokes, even the input choke, are 25
ohms
> or less. Hey I think I know why Dave Slagle eats up his MV tubes!
Ok, this makes me think I've done something wrong. I used the source
impedance calculator built in to the software to estimate my source
impedance using measurements of the winding DCR and off-load voltage. I
measured the DCR across each half of the secondary and added them together
to get the secondary DCR. This gives a source impedance of around 110 ohms
which seems quite high when compared to your numbers, as this is a large and
conservatively rated 250 ma trans. Perhaps I should use the DCR of half the
secondary since you input only half the secondary voltage for the trans when
you use it FWCT? When I do that I get 64 ohms which seems more in line with
your numbers.
OTOH, when you do FWB you input the full secondary voltage into the
software, so I'd think you should use the full secondary DCR to calculate
the source impedance. This would mean that the source impedance of the
tranny is different depending on whether you used FWCT or FWB. I don't
think this makes sense; how would the trans know?
=========================================================================
From: Dan Kerl <dlkerl@knology.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:05:34 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
"Sellek, Grant (TSA)" wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dslagle@earthlink.net [mailto:dslagle@earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2001
> > >
> > >Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
> >
> > if you let the damper warm up and then whack it you may have
> > a problem,
> > but if you let the damper do the turnon, how ar you gonna get anything
> > other than a slow ramp up?
>
> I think Dan Kerl meant exactly that, ie, you are on the breadboard
> testing it, everything is hot, you turn off, pop in a valve or
> attach a meter, and turn on again.
>
> Grant
We occasionally have power glitches around here where the line will drop
for 4-5 seconds, then come back up. If the supply filters bleed down, the
dampers get 'whacked', as Dave aptly put it. The same slow thermal time
constant of the heater-cathode system that makes them nice to use becomes
a liability in this situation. Using the 6D22 model in PSUD II (which
should be a reasonable approximation to a 6CJ3), I see a peak hot-start
current of around 1.2A, which is within the limitations of the device.
I'm looking at an SV811-3 design that's going to use a Hammond 272-JX
(since I have a couple of these laying around) coupled to a 6CJ3 bridge,
then to a CLC filter. It looks like it should be good for 820-830V @
100mA (monoblocks). I'm using the centertap trick to derive the half-voltage
supply for the front end. I'm not anticipating any problems, but all
those filament transformers for heating the bridge are kind of a nusiance.
The added weight increases the Dunker factor, though.
- --
Dan Kerl
dlkerl@knology.net
=========================================================================
From: "Sellek, Grant (TSA)" <Grant.Sellek@transport.sa.gov.au>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 10:05:40 +1030
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dslagle@earthlink.net [mailto:dslagle@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2001
> >
> >Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
>
> if you let the damper warm up and then whack it you may have
> a problem,
> but if you let the damper do the turnon, how ar you gonna get anything
> other than a slow ramp up?
I think Dan Kerl meant exactly that, ie, you are on the breadboard
testing it, everything is hot, you turn off, pop in a valve or
attach a meter, and turn on again.
Grant
=========================================================================
From: "Bart Shepherd \(Home\)" <bart.s@bigpond.net.au>
Subject: RE: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:05:51 +1100
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n792
Dan,
Correct me if Im wrong but I thought these things were indirectly heated and
had a huge breakdown voltage between cathode and heater, so if I've got
enough amps rating I could use a single heater transformer winding for the
whole bridge.
What's the heater voltage and current draw?
Thanks to all who responded! :-) I got some real good insight.
This is for a "lab" supply, that among other things will be used for stereo
parallel 845's. I plan to make breadboards my lounge / listening room decor
feature ( benefits of living alone!).
I may paint everything exotic colours and keep safe under fan cooled perspex
covers.
Mercury could look cool but I don't know anything about them?? RFI
problems??
I'm going choke input with special swinging chokes followed by only 30ufd,
then another choke and probably about 100ufd max. If low internal resistance
is a problem I can always insert an R before the first choke or even design
a snubber!
So far was going to use fancy fast SS diodes BUT 48 parts to make a bridge
4 x 4 diodes, R's and caps) has been keeping me from starting.
If the heater transformer requirements are simple the tubes might be a lot
easier and give me a soft start as well, so also avoiding a tube relay.
Some time I must compare the sound.
Has anyone seriously done this sonics comparison with a first rate SS
ultrafast / soft diode bridge setup bypassed by R and C?
Also worth simulating the tube diode resistance in this case. Just vary the
R I mentioned above?
Hours of endless fun for the dedicated tube head!!
Cheers,
Bart ( who must get off his backside and start this )
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-sound@lists.io.com [mailto:owner-sound@lists.io.com]On
Behalf Of Dan Kerl
Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2001 2:06 PM
To: sound@deliverator.io.com
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
"Sellek, Grant (TSA)" wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dslagle@earthlink.net [mailto:dslagle@earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2001
> > >
> > >Watch peak current on those pesky 'hot starts'.
> >
> > if you let the damper warm up and then whack it you may have
> > a problem,
> > but if you let the damper do the turnon, how ar you gonna get anything
> > other than a slow ramp up?
>
> I think Dan Kerl meant exactly that, ie, you are on the breadboard
> testing it, everything is hot, you turn off, pop in a valve or
> attach a meter, and turn on again.
>
> Grant
We occasionally have power glitches around here where the line will drop
for 4-5 seconds, then come back up. If the supply filters bleed down, the
dampers get 'whacked', as Dave aptly put it. The same slow thermal time
constant of the heater-cathode system that makes them nice to use becomes
a liability in this situation. Using the 6D22 model in PSUD II (which
should be a reasonable approximation to a 6CJ3), I see a peak hot-start
current of around 1.2A, which is within the limitations of the device.
I'm looking at an SV811-3 design that's going to use a Hammond 272-JX
(since I have a couple of these laying around) coupled to a 6CJ3 bridge,
then to a CLC filter. It looks like it should be good for 820-830V @
100mA (monoblocks). I'm using the centertap trick to derive the half-voltage
supply for the front end. I'm not anticipating any problems, but all
those filament transformers for heating the bridge are kind of a nusiance.
The added weight increases the Dunker factor, though.
- --
Dan Kerl
dlkerl@knology.net
=========================================================================
From: Dan Kerl <dlkerl@knology.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:35:49 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n793
Bart wrote:
>
> Dan,
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought these things were indirectly heated and
> had a huge breakdown voltage between cathode and heater, so if I've got
> enough amps rating I could use a single heater transformer winding for the
> whole bridge.
They do have a large heater-cathode breakdown rating. Since I don't have any
later databooks here at the office (GE doesn't give this spec) I chose to
use isolated heater supplies for the bridge based on what I saw in RC-28.
I'm not comfortable stressing heater/cathode isolation with +/-800V, based
on the numbers I saw in the RC-28 manual. I'm using a couple 2A Hammond
transformers for the back-end diodes (cathodes tied to transformer, plates
tied together) and a 4A transformer for the front-end diodes (cathodes are
tied together, plates tied to transformer). Their split-bobbin design
gives them a pretty good hipot rating.
I've had good luck using a common heater supply in lower voltage applications.
I used two in fullwave for the Brook clone stereo amp I just recently got
working, with all 6.3V heaters connected to a common winding.
I'd like to take the opportunity to thank jc for suggesting these things
several years ago (Nov 96).
- --
Dan Kerl
dlkerl@knology.net
=========================================================================
From: Dan Kerl <dlkerl@knology.net>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper diodes
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:21:02 -0600
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n793
(followup on ratings)
6CJ3 heater-cathode ratings from RCA RC-30
peak +300 to -5500 Volts
average +100 to -900 Volts
Other ratings
PIV 5500 V (10 usec max, 15% of NTSC horizontal scan)
peak Ip 2100 mA
av Ip 350 mA
dissipation 6.5 W
instantaneous voltage drop @ Ip=700mA 25V
heater 6.3V @ 1.8 A
I assume that the smaller number refers to the case where the heater is
positive with respect to the cathode, but I'm not sure. The inside of
the cathode cylinder could emit electrons back to the heater, but I
don't imagine that the inside of the cathode is coated with emitter
oxide so it probably wouldn't be that much current. The tubes I have
use that kinky spiral ceramic thingy to isolate the heater from the
inside of the cathode cylinder.
Anyway, since the heater-cathode voltage in my application would exceed
the smaller average number by a significant amount, I decided against
trying to make the heater connections common. YMMV
- --
Dan Kerl
dlkerl@knology.net
=========================================================================
From: Eric Kingsbury <ekingsbu@hawaii.edu>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper in Cathode
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:55:56 -1000 (HST)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n985
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Michael (Mick)Maloney wrote:
> >Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:31:22 +0000
> >From: ldmoore@att.net
> >Subject: [JN] Diode in the cathode
> >
> >At the request of a friend, I thought I would share an
> >idea I had. Suppose one uses a couple of diodes on a
> >center tapped B+ secondary for full wave rectification.
> >Further suppose that one uses a diode dampener for slow
> >turn-on of the B+. This diode dampener is typically in
> >one of two places, either after the rectifier diodes
> >before the B+ power supply filter, or in the ground
> >line, between the circuit grounds and the center tap of
> >the secondary. In either case, it costs one a bit of B+
> >voltage associated with its voltage drop.
> >
> >What about putting the diode dampener in the cathode
> >circuit. It would still provide slow turn-on, gain the
> >voltage drop of the diode dampener with respect to the
> >B+, and, since the diode dampener is now in the cathode
> >circuit, provide a portion of the bias for the tube in
> >the form of cathode bias, presumably with any associated
> >benefit associated with diode bias.
> >
> >Just an idea,
> >L.D. Moore
>
> It's a great idea- my pick for best idea in a long time-sure there have
> been more complex and intricate schemes from our engineer friends but this
> one is sure to work well and give real audio benefit for minimal effort.IMO
> I will try it in one of my 211 or 845 SE amps that use dampers and pass on
> results.
>
> MickM
I like it too. It has some technical constraints, such as picking the
right diode to have the correct I / Vdrop relationship for your output
device (or less, in which case you could either use a little additional
resistance in the cathode, or some fixed bias for adjustability); but it's
elegant as hell. Wonder what the AC impedence of the diode is? Should be
low enough to dispense with that awful cap.
It is 'damper', by the way.
Poinz
=========================================================================
From: Eric Kingsbury <ekingsbu@hawaii.edu>
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper in Cathode
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:56:13 -1000 (HST)
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n985
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 TubeGarden@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/27/01 7:00:07 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> ekingsbu@hawaii.edu writes:
>
>
> > Wonder what the AC impedance of the diode is?
>
> Greets!
>
> Someone posted the 3/2 law makes it 2/3 of the Ra.
>
> More or less.
So, whaddya think; do you still have to bypass it? That was one of its
sterling qualities, to me; not having to find a transparent 100uF cap.
Poinz
=========================================================================
From: TubeGarden@aol.com
Subject: Re: [JN] Damper in Cathode
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:18:18 EDT
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n985
- --part1_128.53baf2a.28e537ea_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 9/27/01 7:00:07 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
ekingsbu@hawaii.edu writes:
> Wonder what the AC impedance of the diode is?
Greets!
Someone posted the 3/2 law makes it 2/3 of the Ra.
More or less.
Happy Ears!
Al B^}
- --part1_128.53baf2a.28e537ea_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/27/01 7:
00:07 PM US Mountain Standard Time, ekingsbu@hawaii.edu writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px
; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Wonder what the AC impedance of the diode is?</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE
=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Greets!
<BR>
<BR>Someone posted the 3/2 law makes it 2/3 of the Ra.
<BR>
<BR>More or less.
<BR>
<BR>Happy Ears!
<BR>Al B^}
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>
- --part1_128.53baf2a.28e537ea_boundary--
=========================================================================
From: "Michael (Mick)Maloney" <supra@cantech.net.au>
Subject: [JN] Damper in Cathode
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 08:04:52 +0800
Source: Sound Digest Archive v02.n985
- --=======67561EE3=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-F273686; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:31:22 +0000
>From: ldmoore@att.net
>Subject: [JN] Diode in the cathode
>
>At the request of a friend, I thought I would share an
>idea I had. Suppose one uses a couple of diodes on a
>center tapped B+ secondary for full wave rectification.
>Further suppose that one uses a diode dampener for slow
>